Tony ClementConservativeMinister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario

Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. As with all other members of this House, I hire people I have confidence in. I certainly was pleased with the work of the individual involved. Much as this was not the case when the hon. member and her colleagues were in power, I followed all the rules.

Mr. Speaker, it is nice that the Minister of Health has finally stood up and spoken to the House.

Let me give Canadians the real facts about this political crony. In 1995 Mr. Gordon Haugh was a tour director for Mike Harris. In 2000 he served as tour director for the Canadian Alliance. In 2002 he was hired by the minister as the minister created two tier health in Ontario. He was paid $300,000 then and his $25,000 a year contract adds up to $300,000 now.

The minister has paid him $25,000 for 33 days of work. This is absolutely not acceptable to Canadians. What does the minister have to say to Canadians who are paying the bill for his political cronies?

Tony ClementConservativeMinister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for itemizing some of the experience that the individual has. It shows that he knows about government. He has been a chief of staff. He has been active in government in the past. I hire people that I have confidence in. I am pleased with the work. I followed all the rules.

I would say once again that “Liberal” and “research” are two mutually exclusive terms.

Mr. Speaker, the Reality of Aid Network report denounced the misappropriation of funds intended for international assistance to finance military operations. The report formally denounced the United States and suggested, without naming names, that Canada and Australia did this as well.

Since Canada is increasingly modeling its foreign policy on that of the U.S., can the Minister responsible for international assistance guarantee that this is not what Canada does with money intended for international assistance?

Mr. Speaker, the proliferation of small arms is another concern. In the past 10 years, 2 million children have died, 6 million have been disabled and 10 million have been left with psychological trauma because of conflicts involving small arms.

Forty-five countries are in favour of ratifying a treaty to limit the proliferation of these weapons. Canada still has not taken a stand. Does the Minister of Foreign Affairs plan to support such a treaty?

Peter Van LoanConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the member has said, this government in fact is very concerned about the flow of small arms, their potential to harm lives and to destabilize conflict situations.

Canada is committed to looking at entering into a treaty and forwarding discussions in that regard. Canada has historically been a leader in disarmament measures. We will continue to be on this issue as well.

Mr. Speaker, if the minister said that the individual has so much experience, where are the results? Where is the action on the health care file?

The bottom line is that Mr. Haugh is paid to lobby on behalf of Internet pharmacies in this country. The Minister of Health is responsible for regulating the drug industry and protecting the drug supply on behalf of Canadians.

The government claimed that it was going to stop the revolving door for lobbyists, but there appears to be an open door policy in the Minister of Health's office.

After all the huffing and puffing about accountability, I would like to ask the minister, where is Mr. Haugh's five year cooling off period?

Tony ClementConservativeMinister of Health and Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario

Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member has her facts completely wrong. The individual involved is not a lobbyist. He is not registered as a lobbyist. He would not be welcome in my office to do any lobbying. He has to follow every rule and guideline in place.

I would say to the hon. member that I have followed the rules. Why did her party not follow the rules as a caucus when it was in government?

Mr. Speaker, after 13 years of Liberal government, Canada's aboriginal peoples continue to face the same needs, such as adequate housing and safe drinking water.

Liberals would like to brag about their record, but if we can believe it, even one of their own candidates has said that the Liberals have “a devastating record on aboriginal issues”.

Would the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development share his thoughts on 13 years of Liberal neglect and how the Conservative government will take action to improve the lives of aboriginal Canadians?

Jim PrenticeConservativeMinister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians

Mr. Speaker, a devastating record is precisely what the Liberals have left after 13 years in office. It is shameful the way the former Liberal government failed aboriginal Canadians.

I hear a lot of noise on the other side. I think members are having trouble digesting the words of their own leadership candidate, the reference to a devastating record. Perhaps it is the 13 years of Liberal ineptitude, incompetence, mismanagement, 13 years of ducking, dodging, dithering, delaying, leaving behind aboriginal Canadians. We will not do that.

Mr. Speaker, forensic accountant Al Rosen recently published a report saying that income trusts could be overvalued in our country by more than 28%. In fact, he called it the $20 billion deception. The problems are abuses in financial reporting, the marketing of business trusts and no laws to protect consumers. The Liberals totally bungled this issue through haphazard announcements and leaks.

When will the government get serious about cleaning up the Liberal income trust mess and when will income trust investors finally get the protection they need?

Mr. Speaker, indeed, there was a bit of a mess that occurred during the last government, relating to income trusts. That is still a matter of some police investigation in Canada.

The question relates to a question I was asked earlier in question period about securities regulation in Canada. The regulation of income trusts presently is with the provincial securities regulators. It is an issue that I know they are reviewing with the income trusts and it is an issue that probably we should discuss further when the finance ministers meet next week.

Mr. Speaker, no, this question is about what the federal government can do now to ensure markets have confidence by giving investors protection.

Many promotional materials on income trusts are intentionally misleading, but the agency with responsibility for this simply does not care. The Accounting Standards Board has refused to defend consumers even though it talks about misleading promotional practices. The government can fix this by changing the Income Tax Act with higher standards.

Will the minister recognize that it is his responsibility to clean up the mess or will he allow more investors to be misled on income trusts?

Mr. Speaker, the member talks about the interests of investors. Indeed, that is one of the reasons why we need a common securities regulator in Canada. We need to protect Canadians who invest through RRSPs, through pension plans, those who invest in mutual funds, those who invest directly through the market, pensioners and others in Canada, not only with respect to the issue raised by the hon. member but also more broadly with respect to enforcement issues in Canada.

I look forward to having those discussions with the securities ministers next week, particularly with a view to establishing national standards and a national securities regulator in Canada.

Mr. Speaker, recent attacks on civilians by the Sri Lankan armed forces have reached a level of atrocity. In Mannar, navy troops lobbed hand grenades into a Catholic church where hundreds of refugees were huddled. Last week the Sri Lankan army raided a Tamil home, leaving the family hacked to death, with their seven and nine year old children hanged and disembowelled in a manner aimed to terrorize the local population.

When will the government protest the latest wave of military atrocities in Sri Lanka?

Deepak ObhraiConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada is extremely concerned with the breakup of ceasefire and peace talks between the warring parties in Sri Lanka. We are calling on both parties to come back to the table, to come back to a truce and adhere to the ceasefire. We are going, with our likeminded nations, to put pressure on bringing both parties to the table.

Mr. Speaker, this weekend Liberal leadership wannabe, the member for Etobicoke—Lakeshore, said that he would cancel all the tax credits the government introduced. That means getting rid of the transit pass tax credit in favour of higher emissions, getting rid of the sports tax credit for families enrolling their kids in sports and physical activities, and the former professor will end tax credits for students. I guess that is the Harvard way. It is certainly not the Canadian way.

Could the finance minister tell us why taking away these tax credits is simply the wrong way to go?

Mr. Speaker, we are in favour of helping the environment. That is why we want a transit pass that will allow people to take public transit, with about two months of free transit per year. We also want to help children be more physically fit. What could be more important for the next generation? We also want to help students and apprentices with tools and textbooks.

We are for public transit. We are for students. We are for our young people.

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development regarding the findings contained in the fifth report in the first session of the 38th Parliament.

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the first report of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security. This report is with regard to the gun registry. It was supported at committee by all opposition parties.

Mr. Speaker, the riding that I represent, Cambridge, Ontario, is actually more than just the city of Cambridge. Just to the southwest of us is a huge, expansive land, with rolling hills, that include a number of small villages, including the village of Ayr. That area is more commonly referred to as North Dumfries.

I propose that the name of the riding be changed from Cambridge to Cambridge—North Dumfries.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to table a private member's bill which would add gender identity or gender expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act, adding explicit protection for transgender and transsexual Canadians from discrimination in all areas of federal jurisdiction.

Trans Canadians face significant prejudice in their daily lives, whether it is job discrimination, access to housing and public services, especially health care, problems with identity documents, difficulties with law enforcements officials, a high suicide rate or the increased likelihood that they will be victims of violence. The situation trans peoples face demands our attention.

The bill would give trans Canadians direct access to the protections provided for in the Canadian Human Rights Act , which they so urgently need.

This should be a non-partisan issue. I would encourage the government to take the initiative to add gender identity or expression in the Human Rights Act. I would be prepared to work with any member from any corner of the House who is willing to give this legislation priority in their private member's legislation time.

Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce a bill to reduce television violence, particularly during peak viewing hours for children.

A recent study by Laval University showed that acts of violence shown on television have tripled since 1994. The purpose of this bill is to amend the Broadcasting Act to create a regulation governing television violence. The CRTC would be responsible for monitoring how large broadcasters apply the regulation that would be created by the bill I am introducing today.